The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
Fundamentals of Gas Shale Reservoirs 2015
DOI: 10.1002/9781119039228.ch6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Petrophysical Evaluation of Gas Shale Reservoirs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 67 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In shale petroleum resource appraisal, the current practice of "volume = porosity × hydrocarbon saturation" is largely based on the understanding of conventional reservoir, and the resulting estimates often yield large uncertainties in resource volume and provide no information with respect to oil mobility. Many laboratory methods designed for conventional reservoirs could be problematic for measuring porosity and water saturation in shale reservoirs (e.g., Passey et al, 2010;Bohacs et al, 2013;Hartigan, 2014). Uncertainties arise because of the presence of large amount of clay minerals (e.g., Passey et al, 2010) and multiscale porous media with different origins and physical/chemical properties in shale reservoirs (Passey et al, 2010;Akkutlu and Fathi, 2012;Bohacs et al, 2013;Hartigan, 2014;Chen et al, 2017b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In shale petroleum resource appraisal, the current practice of "volume = porosity × hydrocarbon saturation" is largely based on the understanding of conventional reservoir, and the resulting estimates often yield large uncertainties in resource volume and provide no information with respect to oil mobility. Many laboratory methods designed for conventional reservoirs could be problematic for measuring porosity and water saturation in shale reservoirs (e.g., Passey et al, 2010;Bohacs et al, 2013;Hartigan, 2014). Uncertainties arise because of the presence of large amount of clay minerals (e.g., Passey et al, 2010) and multiscale porous media with different origins and physical/chemical properties in shale reservoirs (Passey et al, 2010;Akkutlu and Fathi, 2012;Bohacs et al, 2013;Hartigan, 2014;Chen et al, 2017b).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yunosuke SAWA 1) , Yunfeng LIANG 2) , Sumihiko MURATA 3) , Toshifumi MATSUOKA 4) , Takashi AKAI 5) , and Sunao TAKAGI Characteristics of CH4 adsorption and CH4 replacement with CO2 in kerogen micropores were investigated by molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to obtain accurate estimates of CH4 volume and reduction of environmental load by applying multi-stage CO2 fracking for shale gas development. Firstly, CH4 density in the kerogen micropores was found to be about 1.8 times higher than in the mesopores outside the kerogen, indicating that an adsorption model accounting for the micropore filling is essential to correctly evaluate the volume of CH4 adsorption.…”
Section: Molecular Dynamics Simulation Of Adsorption and Replacement mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Multiple publications characterize the porosity [11,12], the porous structure, and permeability of tight sands, shales, and carbonates [13][14][15]. Based on published papers, we summarized conventional methods (basic in core analysis) and unconventional methods (widely applied for tight rock characterization) (Table 1).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%